IE 312 
.43 
I . P75 
Copy 1 





Lf 



THE EVOLUTION 



OF 



THE BOSTON MEDAL 



BY 
HOWARD PAYSON ARNOLD 



7^ C^vuAtn- 

THE EVOLUTION 



OF 



THE BOSTON MEDAL 



A MONOGRAPH BY 



HOWARD PAYSON ARNOLD 



"The truth of history is a sacred thing-."— Thomas W. Higginson. 



PRINTED FOR private; DISTRIBUTION 

BOSTON 
1901 



■\15 



THE CONTINENTAL CONGRESS, by vote passed 
on the 25th of March, 1776, decreed a gold medal 
to General Washington to commemorate his "wise and 
spirited conduct in the seige and acquisition of Boston." 

For various reasons, not the least of which was the lack 
of money, nothing was done for several years towards 
carrying this vote into execution and the mattetr seemed to 
have been forgotten, except by Washington, who, though he 
said nothing, in his heart felt much mortified by the neglect. 
As he wrote to Col. Humphreys, his friend and aide-de-camp, 

"My Dear Humphreys, I thank you for your attention to 
the medal which was voted for me; by Congress. I expected 
it was to have remained on the journals of that honorable 
Body as a dead letter, and never having hinted, — so I never 
intended to hint, my knowledge of such a vote, or my 
apprehension of the effect of it, toi any one in pow|er or in 
office. G. WASHINGTON. 

"Mount Vernon, ist September, 1785."* 

This is the only reference to the medal to be found in any 
of Washington's writings, and it is interesting as a proof that 
at that dalte he had not forgotten it and that he did attach 
a certain importance to the honor it implied, however little 
he seemed to regard it subsequently. 

In the course of nearly ten years after the vote had been 
passed, a conviction gradually arose of the scanty and tardy 
justice that had been done to Washington and to several 
of his companions in arms, and Robert Morris, the 
"Superintendent of Finance" from 1781 to 1784, was 
requested to see that this reward for honorable service was 
procured for Washington, as well as several others that had 

♦Washington Mss. Department of State. 



been similarly granted by Congress. This charge, which 
was to be executed in Paris, was entrusted by Morris to 
Col. David Humphreys, above mentioned, who had just been 
appointed by Congress Secretary of the "Commiissioners for 
negotiating treaties of Commerce with foreign Powers." 
These Commissioners were Franklin, Adams (both of whom 
had already been some years abroad) and Jefferson, who 
was soon to join them. Humphreys sailed from New York 
on the 15th of July, 1784, and reached Paris in the ensuing 
Sq>tember. He seems to have had no especial instructions 
concerning the memorials from Morris, certainly not in 
writing, and the whole matter wias left pretty much to his 
own discretion. In fact he acted throughout as if he weire 
accountable to no one and did not send a rq^ort even to his 
superior. 

Humphreys was one of those companionable, popular, 
kaleidoscopic characters that now and then appear for the 
amusement and decoration of the wodd at large, but who 
rarely betray much depth or application for serious business. 
However, \yith the help of tact, good nature, general 
intelligence, a ready wit and many glittering accomplishments, 
he had achieved a certain success and a position in the country 
tlxat kept him always before the people and in the line of 
possible promotion. His war record had done him honor 
and Washington was sincerely attached to him, having given 
him, besides other marks of favor, the epaulettes he wore at 
Yorktown. In various quarters he was thought to be a poet 
and he really possessed a faculty, not so common in those 
days as now, for the copious production of heroics, patriotic 
and other. His vers de soci^t^, humorous and sparkling, had 
made him widely knowm and so had his "Yankee in England" 
and other printed facetiae, while his "Address to the Armies 
of the United States" had even been translated into excellent 
French by the Chevalier de Chastellux, with subsequent 
approval of royalty itself.* He had also added his tributary 

*"My success," writes the Chevalier, " has equalled and even 
surpassed my expectations. Not only has the public received the 
work with favor, but it has succeeded perfectly at court, especially 



laurel to "Death-daring Putnam". In 1787, when Harvard 
bestowed its LL.D. upon Jefferson and Thomas Brand Hollis, 
its honorary A.M. was conferred upon Humphreys, possibly 
through the influence of Jefferson, upon whom he had 
contrived to obtain a "pull'', as he did upon almost every 
one with whom he came in contact and who could advance 
his interests.* 

Moreover, Col. Humphreys was indebted to Dartmouth 
College for the higher preferment of an LL.D. and Brown 
bestowed the same. He was, likewise, a Fellow of the 
American Academy and even of the Royal Society — an 
exceptional distinction at that time, which he owed to the 
friendship of Sir Joseph Banks and, indirectly, to the sea 
serpent whose claims to existence he had always persistently 
advocated in a way that suggested the early ages of serpent 
worship. 

In spite of these plausible and seductive endowmejitf. 
Humphreys had his limitations, and as he had never been in 
Paris, or anywhere else outside of his own country; as he 
could neither write nor speak French; as he had no diplomatic 
experience and was altooether unfamiliar v/ith the forms ai.d 

with the King and Qvteen who have praised it highly." — Letter to 
Franklin at Paris, June 21, 1786. 

In his reply, dated 17th of April, 1787, from Philadelphia, Franklin 
says nothing about the poem, which is not surprising considering 
his feeling towards Humphreys. 

The Chevalier was a volunteer officer in our Revolutionary Army 
and a friend of Franklin's. 

*Jefferson writes to John Jay, 

"Paris, March 5, 1786. 

"Col. Humphreys, Secretary of Legation, being about to return home 
in April, I think it my duty to bear witness to his ready, able and 
faithful discharge of all his duties." To this was added a statement 
that "his talents and disposition might be available for future use." 

A month later Jefferson again takes up the pen in behalf of the 
Colonel in a letter to James Monroe, 

"Paris, May 10, 1786. 

"I must beg to recommend Col. Humphreys to your acquaintance 
and good offices. He is an excellent man and an able one and in need 
of some provision." 



the phrases of diplomacy or with the manners and the habits 
of diplomats, it is quite manifest that he was ill-fitted for his 
office as Secretary of the new Commission. Franklin described 
him as "a gentleman who-, though he might have a good deal of 
inilitar}' merit, certainly had none in the diplomatic line, and 
bad neitb.er tlie French language, nor the experience, nor the 
address proper to qualify him for such an employment."* 

If the qualifications of Humphreys as secretary were so 
limited, those that were needed for his other mission were 
still less manifest. Fie had no particular insight or acumen; 
no natural taste; no knowledge of art or of any of its 
processes, mechanical or other; no faculty, in short, that 
would help him towards rendering an intelligent and 
authoritative opinion upon a single feature of a medal or 
of any other work of art.** Those facts were very soon 
apparent to the members of the Academy, and if it had 
not been for the powlerful influence of Lafayette, to whom 
Washington had given Humphreys a letter of introduction, 
the latter would have found his progress much slower than 
it was and his scheme would have received a scanty welcome 
from a body who cared little or nothing for its object. It 

*Prom a letter to Charles Thomson, Perpetual Secretary to Con- 
gress, dated "Philadelphia, 29th Nov., 1788". These words give the 
result of the writer's own observation of Col. Humphreys and his 
operations in France for nearly a year. 

**Humphreys has left on record a specimen of his critical faculties 
which reveals the poverty of his equipment. This was his comment 
on the design for the medal. Writing to Washington from Paris 
in May, 1785, he says "I think it has the character of simplicity 
and dignity which is to be aimed at in a memorial of this kind." Only 
this and nothing more! A singularly thin, barren and futile estimate, 
as of one who "damned with faint praise" because he knew nothing 
else to say and was afraid to commit himself. Humphreys was clearly 
"the most senseless, fit man" for his place and he received the appoint- 
ment, both of Secretary and otherwise, merely because of that 
extensive and irresistible "pull" on every public character from 
Washington down which I have already mentioned, being a man 
who was always, as Jefferson wrote, "in need of some provision". 
He was certainly one to whom no "provision" came amiss, and ho 
continued thus omnivorous to the last 



was to Lafayette that he chiefly OAved such consideration 
as was paid him and his aid wias really essential in preparing 
the petition to the Academy and other papers. Lafayette 
was the most tenacious and forceful link in the chain that 
connected the two countries and his intimate attachment to, 
and admiration for, Washington doubled its strength, while 
it also spurred him to- farther efforts in behalf of any 
undertaking that was to promote his fame. 

The Colonel was in no hurry to begin his official duties, 
but lavishly curtailed his term at each end. He sailed from 
New York, July i6, 1784, and reached Paris early in 
September, more than three months after his appointment. 
Lie left that city in November, 1785, in order to make a long 
stay in London previous to his departure for America, six 
months later. He had been in Paris seven months before 
making his application to the Academy. 

Ahev the arrival of Humphreys in Paris one would suppose 
that in the cc^urse oi a few weeks, at least, he would begin 
his work in behalf of the various memorials and especially ot 
the Boston medal. For this purpose he would naturally first 
cf all invoice the kind offices of Franklin and Adams. The 
former was a "Bo'Ston boy", who had always displayed a 
peculiar attachment to his native city and had eagerly favored 
any plan for her celebrity and honor. Adams, too, was 
hardly less than a "Boston boy'" and had been prominently 
identified with hei" patriotic deeds and her historic fame. He 
also had a personal interest in the medal, for it was voted 
by Congress after an elocjuent speech by him announcing 
the fall of Boston, followed by his motion that such a 
memorial ought tO' be presented to^ its conqueror. Moreover, 
both of these fellow-citizens of Humphreys were well known 
in Paris by all classes, including the most learned, illustrious 
and influential. They were familiar with the language and 
could have lent most powerful aid to any cause that they might 
favor. This Avas especially true of Franklin, whose scientific 
distinction was no less than his diplomatic and political, and 
whose position as member of the Academy of Sciences gave 
liim far more prestige than to Adams. Yet it is a fact that 



8 

neither of these representatives of Boston had anything to 
do with the evolution of the medal, from the first steps to 
the last. This was the more conspicuous in the case of 
Franklin, whose conduct must have been peculiarly 
demoralizing among his friends and admirers in the Academy 
of Inscriptions and Belles Lettres. Of course, they could 
not have been expected to display much enthusiasm in favor 
of a project which was entirely ignored by a savant of such 
fame and who^ was born in the very same town most 
concerned in the honor sought.* 

The cause of this peculiar attitude of Franklin is easy to 
discover. Col. Humphreys was not a "persona grata" to 
him and never could be under any circumstances, nor could 
Franklin ever undertake to favor any project in which he 
was concerned. He was an embodied grievance and Franklin 
was not magnanimous enough toi ignore his owli pique and 
sense O'f personal wrong, even in an affair that should have 
sttrongly appealed to every sentiment of public spirit and 
patriotism. Col. Humphreys had obtained the very position 
that Franklin had exerted himself to secure for his grandson, 
William Temple Franklin, a claim tO' which he thought 
himself to possess a sort of prescriptive right. For seven 
years the latter had been his secretary on a salary of only 

♦Franklin was much interested in medals generally, as every reader 
of his life is aware, and was an authority on the subject. The famous 
medal he had designed after the surrender of Cornwallis and had 
presented to the King will recur to everyone. At this very time. 
May 10, 1785, he wrote about others to John Jay, Secretary for Foreign 
Affairs, but not a word concerning the Boston memorial. It wa» 
Franklin who designed the seal with the motto "Salus in Simplici," — 
"Safety in Simplicity", which was engraved for him by Dupre in the 
spring of 1783. 

I do not find the name of Franklin in any one of Humphrey's 
numerous letters. 

Franklin left Paris for home in July, 1785, and was thus ten months 
in that city after the advent of Humphreys. Adams was there until 
May, 1785, when he left to become Minister of England. There were 
eight months during which he might have proffered his aid to Hum- 
phreys. Jefferson was in France from August, 1784, until September, 
1X8*, but the help he gave was both little and reluctant. 
^ ) 



yoo livres per annum, and ever since the spring of 1781 
Franklin had persistently pressed his demands for something 
better. His grandson was well fitted for the office of charge 
d' affaires, for secretary in various capacities, or for other 
diplomatic duties, as Franklin stated, ''on the grounds of his 
probity, his genteel address, sagacity and judgment, and for 
his facility in speaking French". These gifts would have 
made him equal to the demands of almost any diplomatic 
station, yet the only reply to Franklin's appeal was the arrival 
of Col. David Humphreys, who knew nothing about his 
business and whose chief role thus far had been that oi one 
perpetually "in need of some pirovision"; a political tramp. 
It is hardly surprising that Franklin gave the impecunious 
Colonel the cold shoulder and bittetrly thought of his own 
exertion in behalf of his country and his life-long sacrifices 
of all that men hold dear.* 

For reasons not very obvious, Humphreys made but slow 
progress in his work on the Congressional memorials and it 
was more than six months after he reached Paris before any 

*It was fortunate for the peace of mind of this fond and ambitious 
grandparent that he did not live to read the judgment pronounced 
on the sole descendant that bore his name by another "Boston boy", 
Rev. Edward Everett Hale, who styled him "a man of very small 
calibre; nothing alas! but the grandson of his grandfather. He was 
neither an American nor an Englishman. He was very nearly nothing, 
but, I suppose, like most nothings, more conceited than the greatest". 
Mr. Hale also termed him "a slow coach, honest, earnest, proud, 
opinionated, laborious, fussy, an unmethodical muddler, an incom- 
petent editor and uncommonly dilatory in his habits". See letter 
from Dr. Hale in the "Report of the Joint Committee on the Library. 
U. S. Senate, May 1, 1882." This leads very naturally to the inference 
that there may, perchance, be a word to say in defence of the 
Congressional ingratitude. It is quite possible that some few of 
the many ilaws eventually revealed in this "one entire and perfect 
chrysolite" of Franklin may have been suspected, or perchance dis- 
closed, and that their existence may have tended to neutralize even the 
long and distinguished services of his grandfather, and, thus apparent 
Injustice was not such rank injustice after all. Magna est Veritas et 
praevalet. Wm. Temple Franklin's treatment of his grandfather's 
autobiography goes far to show his characteristic qualities and the 
exact amount of his gratitude and regard for his memory. 



lO 



fruit of his exertion was visible. As to this part of his 
mission only two sources of evidence apparently now exist, 
one is in the Journal of the Academy of Inscriptions and Belles 
Lettres, and the other in a letter f roni Humphreys to Washing- 
ton, now on file in the Department of State, Vol. 67, page 295, 
"Letters to Washington". Both of these I have copied in 
extenso. 

The Academy Journals are scanty, superficial and every 
way unsatisfactory. They offer but little aid to one looking 
for the inception of the Boston medal, but they must be used 
for lack of anything better, and as they are the principal 
means now available. We learn from the description of the 
Stance of April 22nd, 1785, that the whole subject was "bien 
discute", but there is very little proof of this assertion, so 
little, in truth, as to make it very clear that nothing will 
ever be known as to the particular share of anyone in this 
discussion, or as to the reasons, if reasons there were, that 
led to the choice of the commonplace design and legend that 
now appear on the Washington medal. One thing is evident — 
the matter did not greatly interest the Academy of Inscriptions 
and Belles I.ettres, though this might have been foreseen, as 
its members would naturally be less attracted by military 
affairs, than by those connected with literature and science.* 
Moreover, it was all a novelty tO' them and quite outside any 
former experience. They had not been in the habit of 
providing devices and legends for foreign nations. Hence 
at the four meetings where the project was presented ir 
received but slight attention and the members were only too 
glad, after some superficial discussion, to revive an old and 
abandoned custom and refer the whole to a committee of four. 

From the testimony of the Academy records Washington 
seems to have been but a vague personality at best, "une 
quantit(^ n,(^g1igpable". The members did not even give him 

*As JUx. Morse has truly remarked in his admirable "Life of 
Jefferson", when treating of his ministry in Paris, "The ancient 
monarchies of Europe knew little and cared less about the parvenu 
republics of a distant continent". The French Academy in every 
branch was thoroughly impregnated with the same feeling. 



II 

the title of General and apparently no' more importance (if as 
much) was attached to him than to "les officiers G^n^raux, le 
G^n^ral Gates et le General Green", as these were invariably 
temied. They did not even know how tO' spell the name of 
the hero whom they had been asked tO' honor, at least so far 
as can be inferred from their Journals. At their hands he 
fared indifferently as "M. Wastington", M. Wasinghtoii" and 
"Georgio' Wasinghon," They did not happen tO' hit it right 
in a single instance.* For these blunders there was not the 
least excuse, as Col. Humplireys had given them Washington's 
name in his letter. It all really arose from their utter 
indifference. Luckily at the la.st moment a "Deus ex machina" 

*The name of Washington suffered much at the hands of the 
French playwrights, who were eager to exploiter his career, and 
still more from the actors, to whom both the "W" and the "sh" 
were naturally stumbling blocks. The wildness of their pronun- 
ciation may be inferred, and thus the popular ignorance on this 
head was increased, but they never gave it a thought, any more 
than they did to the absurd farrago of complicated nonsence which 
from time to time they were called upon to present to the public 
as chapters from the great Liberator's life. To the friends of the 
rising spirit of liberty that was then abroad, Washington proved 
a most fortunate and available trouvaille, but to the great majority 
he was simply a type, an ideal abstraction, a name to conjure with, 
and they cared nothing for the cold and genuine facts of his career, 
which would have only served to blight the public enthusiasm. 
Hence it was not necessary that the various plots should even be 
"founded on fact" and no one felt surprised at the advent on the 
stage of Washington's son, "Vazington fils", as he appeared in 1785 
in "Asgiil, drame en cinq actes, par J. S. le Barbier-le-Jeune", also 
in "La Liberte du Nouveau Monde" by M. de Sauvigny, which was 
presented for the first time at the Theatre de la Nation, July 13, 
1791, as well as in numerous other plays, even as late as 1815. In 
the one last mentioned, "Vazington" says: 

"J' ai rempli les devoirs d' un citoyen fiddle, 
Et si quelque succ§s a couronng mon z61e, 
.Te le dois aux guerriers dont 1' heroique ardeur 
De mes nobles travaux a partage 1' honneur." 

With such effective aid from the stage, it is hardly surprising 
that the name of Washington was generally misspelt by the public, 
though it must be admitted that they were surpassed by the "Academy 
of Inscriptions and Belles Lettres", which fairly carried off the 
palm for fantastic, elaborate and reckless distortion. 



12 



appeared and relieved the situation, so that "Wasinghon" 
was not engraved on the medal. 

On the whole we must admit that the combined wisdom 
and intelligence of these luminaries failed to produce any 
notable result, except a display of bad Latin. The prosy 
array of monotonous facts which they elaborated for an 
inscription suggest nothing but perfunctory incompetence and 
lack of taste, while as to the design, it was hardly necessary 
to apply to the ^lite of France for a device that could have 
been produced by any airtist of average talent. 

"Registire des Assemblees et deliberations de 1' Academic 
royale des Inscriptions et Belles Lettres pendant V annee, 1785. 

seance du 8 Avril, 1785. 

Messieurs De 1' Averdy — honoraire. 

Bairtheiemy, De Sigrais, De Guignes, Dupuy, Gaillard, 
Bejot, Davier — Pensionnaires. 

Anguetil, Ameilhon, Bouchaud, De Sibert, De Rochefort, 
Desormeaux, Le Blond, Dusaulx, Larcher, De Keralio, Brotier, 
Auger, Vauvilliers — Associ^s. 

D. Poirier, Mongey, Camus — Associ^s libres Residents. 



M. le Secretaire a fait part d' une lettre de M. Humphreys, 
ancien, colonel au service des Etats-Unis, par laquelle il 
demande trois medailles pour M. Wastington, le Generel 
Gates et le Generel Green. II envoye en meme temps des 
renseignments sur les actions de ces trois personnes. 

L' Academic a remis ^ la huitaine pour s' occuper de ces 
trois medailles. 

seance du 19 Avril. 

On a pro'pose ensuite, vu le temps qu' on perd en faisant 
des Inscriptions et des Medailles dans les Seances de 1' 
Academic, de reprendre 1' ancien usage de les faire par 
Commissionaires. 

II a decide fi la pluralite des voix qu' k V avenir on nommer- 
oit des Commissionaires, comme on le faisoit par le passe. 



13 

Apres ces diff^rents arrangements, on sest occupy des 
Medailles demand^es par le Congres d' Am^rique, et 1' on a 
invit(^s Mrs les Academiciens h apporter des projects pour ces 
Medailles ^ la premiere Stance dans laquelle on est convenii 
de nommer des commissionaires pour rediger ces Medailles. 



Seance du 22 Avril. 

Messieurs 

Barth^l^my, De Sigrais, De Guignes, Dupuy, Gaillard, 
Garnier, Bejot, Dacier — Pensionnaires. 

Anquetil, Ameilhon, Bouchard, De Sibert, De Rochefort, 
Le Roy, Desarmeaux, Le Blond, Dusaulx, Larcher, Gueui^e, 
De Keralio, Brotier, Auger, Vauvilliers, Houard — Associes. 

M. Dacier — 

II a fait ensuite la lecture des projets des trois Medailles 
pour les trois Officers G^n^raux Am^ricains. Apres les avair 
bien discutes, on a nomm^ pour les terminer Mrs Barthel^my, 
Dupuy, Brotier, Le Blond. 

Stance du 26 Avril. 

M. le Secr^aire kit ensuite les sujets des medailles de- 
mand^es par le Congres pour trois officers Gen^raux. 

Pour M. Wasinghton 

D' un cot^ s;a tete. 

Legende, 

Georgio Wasinghon Supremo Duci exerituum, 

adsertori Libertatis. 

Exergue, 

Comitia Americana. 

Revers., 

La prise de Boston, 1' armee angloise fuyant vers le rivage 

pour s' embarquer etc., 

Legende, Hostibus, ou Anglis, primum Fugatis, 

Exergue. 

Bostonium recuperatum die 17 Martii, anno 1776. 



14 

Letters to Washington, Vol. 67, pp. 295-6. Depart, of 
State. 

Paris, May, 1785. 
My Dear General : — 

Jf: s|: ****** * 

Upon my leaving America Mr. Morris invested me with 
the power of procuring tl:e several honorary presents which 
had been voted by Congress to different officers in their 
service during the late War — The Royal Academy of 
Inscriptions and Belles Lettres, to- whom; I addressed a letter 
on the subject,* have furnished me with the following device 
and inscription for the Gold Medal which is to be executed 
for your excellency — 

"On one side the head of the General. Legend: 

Georgio Washington supremo Duci Exercituum adsertori 
Libertatis Comitia Americana. On the reverse: Taken [sic] 
possession of Boston. The American Army advances in good 
order towards the town which is seen at a distance, while 
the British army flies with precipitation towards the shore 
tO' embark on board the vessels with which the harbour is 
covered. In the front of the American Army appears the 
General oii horse-back in a group oi Officers, whom he seems 
to make observe the flight of the enemy. 

Legend : Hostibus primo fugatis. 

Exergue: — Bostonium, recuperatum die XVTI Martii. 
MDCCLXXVI". 

I think it has the character of simplicity and dignity which 
is to be aimed at in a memorial of this kind, which is designed 
to transmit the remembrance oi a great event to posterity. 
You really do not know how much your name is venerated on 
this side of the Atlantic. * * * * 

♦Humphreys was apparently the sole author of this scheme for 
promoting the Washington medal and "giving It a good send-off", as 
it were. At least, I can find nothing to the contrary, and it sounds 
like him, though Lafayette lent his aid to it. It certainly had a 
grand and plausible air and Humphreys doubtless thought it a won- 
derfully happy hit, but it was not a success, and Lafayette would 
have done better to advise him to apply to Duvivier at the outstart. 



15 

With my most respectful and affectionate regards to Mrs. 
Washington and complts. to all the family, 
I have the honor to be, 
My Dr. General, 

Yonr sincere friend & h^^^ selrv^ 

D. HUMPHREYS. 
General Washington. 

From the contents of Col. Humphreys' letter to Washington, 
we learn that within a short timq after its final vote had been 
passed, the Academy of Inscriptions and Belles Lettres had sent 
him a sketch of the medal for Washington taken from the 
description of its proposed design on their records, the details 
of which, as set forth by Humphreys, agree entirely with 
the original text now existing. This sketch must have been 
much larger, as it inevitably Would be, than could have been 
portrayed on any medal. It is also indicated by Humphreys' 
com-ments, such as, "the American army advances in good 
order towards the tovv^n"', "The British army flies with 
precipitation'', and others quite as specific, though some 
allowance should be made for the expansion of a sanguine 
and vivid imagination. This sketch was doubtless intended 
not only for Humphreys, but for the use of the future 
engraA'cr. As to its author, nothing will ever be known, 
since the Journals make no sign and the Academy never 
had any official draughtsman or painter whose duty it would be 
to prepare such a sketch. He was presumably employed 
merely for the occasion. Whoever he may have been, it 
was certainly not Duvivier, who ultimately engraved the 
medal, but who had nothing tO' do' with it till some time 
later, when he abbreviated and condensed the sketch into 
the necessary space, and by means of his keen eye and skilf nl 
hand gave it such artistic value as it now possesses, the result 
being simply the clever adaptation, largely mechanical, of 
another's work. The bust is a masterpiece and was 
admirably and faithfully reduced from thait by Houdon.* 

*It is worthy of note that the bust on the Washington raed^l 
does not reprer.ent hira as he appeared at the time of the capture 



i6 



From all these facts we are driven to the conclusion that 
the medaJ has a four-fold parentage, and that it was finally 
evolved by the united efforts of the committee of four and 
the unknown author of the sketch, together with Houdon 
and Duvivier. These were all more or less responsible. This 
intermixture may partly account for the fact that it is one 
of the least esteemed of Duvivier's works. 

It was fortunate that the author of the sketch knew how 
to spell Washington's name and was sufficiently enlightened 
and considerate to alter its form from the various twists 
bestowed upon it by the Academicians. 

I desire here to offer a short comment on the legend that 
was originally suggested for the reverse of the medal, as 
well as on that which it now bears. When four distinguished 
pundits put their heads together in order to elaborate a short 
Latin motto We may justly look for both accuracy and 
elegance, especially when one of them, like Brotier, not only 
claimed to be a Latinist oi the first class, but had sought to 
prove it by bringing out an edition of the works of Tacitus, 
the most exact and polished of all the Roman writers. But 
thtse expectations are not realized in the case before us, at 
least in one instance, that of the use of the word "primum" 
in the phrase "hostibus primum fugatis." If this was 
intended to mean "for the first time", though not bad Latin, 
it was at least incorrect historically, for the enemy had already 
been beaten at Lexington and Concord and it was thus unfit 
for the destined use. So far as the language is concerned, 
however, and remembering that the word was not finally 
employed on the seal, the Academy is entitled to the benefit 
of Boston, but nine years later, when the work of Houdon was done. 
His features and expression had undergone a considerable change 
during that period. This is plain to anyone who compares the Houdon 
bust with the miniature likeness taken in 1777 by C. W. Peele and 
now in the Huntington Collection, Metropolitan Museum of Art, New 
York, or with the full length portrait in oil painted in 1779 by the 
same artist at the request of the Supreme Executive Council 
of Pennsylvania and now belonging to Mr. Thomas McKean. This 
was considered by Dr. Craik "a most faithful likeness of him as he 
appeared in the prime of his life". 



17 

of the doubt, and we may admit for the momienit that tliis 
miight have been their intended nieaninig. It is all the more 
Hkely, since they knew httle and cared less about the first 
struggles of a new republic, or, in truth, about anything else 
that had taken place outside their own country. Bound up in 
measureless conceit, it is not by any means incredible that 
they had never heard of Lexington or Concord, and thus 
thought the enemy had been discomfited ''for the first time'" 
at Boston and "primum" was therefore correct.* 

If, however, the Academicians wished to signify, as there 
is good reason to believe they did, "after the enemy had been 
previously defeated", though the sense might have been 
sufficiently clear, the word "primum" would have been 
inelegant and redundant and no Latin writer in good rq>ute 
would have sanctioned such a use of it. But it was not 
ck'Stined to be used on the medal, for in some way when the 

*Jefferson, who was an accomplished scholar, made use of "primum" 
in this sense when preparing his inscription for the pedestal of 
Houdon's statute of Washington at the time of its completion in 
Paris, but he limited the word entirely to his concise epitome of 
Washington's military career and did not apply it in reference to 
the general military annals of the country. As Jefferson could not 
have had a chance to peruse the records of the Academy of Inscriptions 
and Belles Lettres, it is odd that he should have hit upon the same 
phrase it had first adopted for the Boston medal. On the front side, 
of course, appeared the name of Washington, and on the others these 
inscriptions, — 

On the first, "Hostibus primum fugatis", referring to the evacuation 
of Boston. 

On the second, "Hostibus iterum devictis", that is, the capture 
of the Hessians at Trenton. 

On the third, "Hostibus ultimum debellatis", that is, the surrender 
of Cornwallis at Yorktown. 

In the first phrase "primum" is plainly intended to signify "for 
the first time", that is in Washington's military history. In the 
second phrase "iterum" means the "second time", and in the third 
phrase "ultimum", "the last time". 

I may here suggest that as Humphreys undoubtedly allowed 
Jefferson to see the final form of the legend on the medal, it is 
strange the latter did not call attention to the poor quality of ifs 
Latin and propose an improvement. 






i8 

legend reached Humphreys, it had been changed into "primo", 
as it now appears, and thus a bad matter had been made 
worse, for "primo" was not the right word under any aspect, 
either Hngual or historic. It would be interesting to learn 
the exact reason for this alteration and the name of the 
author, but these will never be. found out. The Journals 
fail to reveal any authority for such a translation on the 
part of the Academy, and the obvious conclusion is that it 
was done by the maker of the sketch sent to Humrphreys, and 
that of his own motion, being quite indifferent as to the 
possible risk or detection and punishment. Whatever may 
be said of his Latin, there was at least the permanent and 
desirable advantage of the abbreviationi of a word and the 
gain oif a little space. If ir had only occurred to him, 
he might have gained still more, for the right word w^as 
"prius" — "hostibus prius fugatis" — which is even shorter than 
"primo", though even that was unnecessary, for "hostibus 
fugatis" alone would have been good Latin and amply 
sufficient to express the same meaning, while the room 
obtained would have been relatively enormous. As to the 
use of "prius", it is remarkable that it did not dawn upon 
Brotier and his colleagues at the very beginning. Had they 
but given the matter thorough and scholarly examination, 
they could have found plenty of examples among the best 
Latin authors that would have quickly convinced them of 
their error. If we turn tO' Horace's Odes, IV, 15, 28, we 
find "Rite deos prius apprecati". In the annals of Tacitus 
w;e read, XII, 64, "Perdita prius Lepida". In the same work, 
XIII, 50, "Multum prius laudata magnitudine animi", and 
in XVI, 14, "Monito prius Anteis". But it would be futile 
be multiply examples. It is very odd that some of these did 
not suggest themselves, at least to Brotier, considering his 
relation tO' Tacitus. It is to be regretted that the artist, if 
he was an artist, did not make a far more sensible and 
profitable variation and substitute "Bostonia"' for the 
"Bostonium" of the legend. The improvement would have 
been very obvious, for not only would still more space have 
been gained, but a more melodious word and one more in 



19 

accord with Latin taste and culture have been adopted, since 
the ending in "a" for Roman towns is much more common 
than tliat in "um". This will be quickly remembered, tO' say 
nothing of other instances, by every reader of Macaulay':? 
Lays, where the former occurs at least twice as often as 
the latter. "Roma" itself seems tO' dominate the situation, 
while "Bostonia condita" oo the city seal will at once present 
itielf U' every Bostonian.* 

One would naturally infer that Humphreys after the receipt 
of the sketch for the Washington medal would forthwith 
have devoted all his energies tO' promote its completion, but 
this he did not think fit to do. On the contrar}' he seems 
to have given his first attention to the Gates and Green 
memorials. An engraver was quickly secured fcr each of 
these and their work was urged forward with such energy 
that both their medals were nearly, or quite, done before that 
of their illustrious chief had even been started. In a letter 
from Jefferson to John Jay dated Paris, Feb. 14, 1787, v.c 
read, "The workman who was to make that of General 

*Charles Saunier in his "Augustin Diipr^" favors his readers with 
a description of the making of the Boston medal, which I venture to 
quote on account of its numerous and reckless errors and as an 
interesting example of the French indifference to historical, or any 
other, truth and of the national distaste for careful investigation. 

P. 18. "Benj. Franklin was charged with the execution of tlie 
decrees of Congress. The r)hilosopher knew Di.pre. He live.1 fit 
Passy and Dupre owned a little country house near there at Anteuil, 
rue Boileau. Both were early risers. Every morning Dapre betook 
himself to Paris hy the Oours-la-Reine, smoking his pipe. He used 
to meet Franklin, who took this route. Some occasion brought them 
together and the engraver and philosopher became friends. In 177S 
Dupre engraved 1 seal for Franklin with this device "Tn Simplicir? 
Salus"* [sic], but in spite of these relations it was not to him that 
he addressed himself for the execution of the first medals. With a 
pusillanimity peculiarly American, he went to the popular notorieties, 
to Benjamin Duvivier, member of the Royal Academy of Painting 
and Sculpture and "Graveur geneial des Monnaies." lit was he who 
executed the medal voted by Congress to Washington for the evacuation 
of Boston, a medal of skilful workmanship, but without the least 
inspiration, imagination or genius. 

*Now in the Public Library of Boston." 



2C 

Greene brought me yesterday tlic medal in gold".* This 
was written after Humphreys' return to America the previous 
/Vpril, and more than two yeirs before the completion of 
Washington's medal in 1789. 

Talking all the circumstances into account, this conduct 
of Humphreys seems altogether inexplicable, nor is it easy 
to offer even a plausible conjecture therefor. Leaving out 
his attachment to Washington, as well as the fact that the 
medal had been voted long before those to Gates and Greene 
had even been thought of, and that for an achievement much 
more brilliant than any of theirs, the other claims of 
Washington, from every point of view, to supreme recognition 
should have placed him first and foremost , before any other. 
^Vhy Humphreys thus banished him to the background will 
never be known. He did begin certain vague negotiations 
with the famous Duvivier, but after some haggling and 
wrangling abcMit the amount to be paid, the discussion came 
to nothing, though Humphreys was finally constrained to 
allow the artist his price, and the only result was a 
delay of nearly a year in beginning the work. In December, 
1785, Humphreys went to England for a long stay and left 
the whole matter, with little regret, in charge of the dilatory 
and indifferent Jefferson. The latter wrote him from Paris 
under date of May 7, 1786, "I have received the books and 
papers you mention and will undertake tO' have finished what 
you left undone of the medals, or at least will proceed in it, 
till the matter shall be put into better hands. 
Your friend and servant, 

TH. JEFFERSON.** 

In a letter to Jefferson dated "London, Jan. 30. 1786", 
Humphreys wrote "Now that there is no obstacle to 
commencing the medal for Gen. Washington, since Houdon's 
return" etc.*** The only connection of Houdon with the medal 
was through the bust of Washington that he had modelled 

♦Letters of Jefferson, Vol. II, No. 107, p. 2, Dept. of State. 
♦♦Letters from Jefferson, 1st series, Vol. 2, p. 54, Department of State. 
♦♦♦Letters to Jefferson, series 2. Vol. 40, No. 5, Department of State. 



21 

ait Mount Vernon in October, 1785, and which it was 
somehow understood was to be copied for the medal. From 
Humphreys' language, it seems that he thought, or pretended 
to think, that nothing could be done to any part of the medal 
until the engraver had this bust in his possession. The 
truth, however, was that the twO' sides of the work had little 
to do with each other until their completion, and as the 
execution of the reverse, with its numerous figures and other 
features, was far more delicate, difficult and laborious than 
the bust, it should have been commenced long before that. 
Thus the suggestion of Humphreys that the absence of 
Houdon had delaved the progress of the medal was both 
flimsy and incorrect. The only delay was caused by 
Humphreys himself, though it is probable he was plenitifully 
Iielped in his procrastination by Jefferson, who cared little 
for the medal and did nothing for its progress except under 
pressure. He was not altogether blind to the merits of 
Boston, bitt at the same time aJl he cared for in the way of 
art was the Houdon statue and tO' this he was quite ready 
tO' sacrifice the Boston medal. He wrote many letters during 
1785 and 1786 to Patrick Henry, then Governor of Virginia, 
to John Jay and others about the new enterprise of Houdon 
and its numerous aspects, but one looks in vain for a single 
reference to the medal in any of his correspondence. As 
I have elsewhere stated,* "The reason of course was that one 
was voted by "his country" and "my Country", and "the 
other merely by Congress in behalf of everybody else's 
country". 

Humphreys went back tO' America in April, 1786, taking 
with him several swords that had been voted by Congress 
as honorary gifts. It would be interesting tO' learn what 
explanation he offered to Washington — he made a long stay 
at Mbunt Vernon soon after his return^ — as tO' the 
extraordinar}' management l:)y which he had succeeded in 
delaying still longer a matter that had already been kept 
too long in abeyance and had secured the engraving of the 

♦Historic Side-Lights, p. 268. 



22 

Green and Gates medals, while he had abandoned that of 
Washington to the uncertain supervision of Jefferson. 

Before leaving Paris Humphreys seems to have consulted 
not only Duvivier, but another artist named Gatteaux, and 
even went so far as tO' entrust to him the sketch he had 
received from the Academy, but nothing came of this any 
more than of the other. This transaction is mentioned in 
the letter to Jefferson already quoted. 

"London, Jan. 30, 1786. Dear Sir, 

Gatteaux, the Engraver, lives in the Street St. Thomas de 
Louvre opposite the Treasury of the Duke de Chartres. Now 
that there is no obstacle to commencing the medal for Gen. 
Washington, since Houdon's return, I could wish (should it 
not ]ye giving you too much trouble) that yoii would send 
for Duvivier, who lives in the Old Louvre, and propose to 
him undertaking it upon exactly the terms he had offered, 
which I think were 2400 livres, besides the gold expense of 
coining. If he should not choose it, we must let it rest until 
Dupr^ shall have finished Gen. Greene's. Gatteaux has a 
paper on which is the description of Gen. Washington's medal. 
I am, Dear Sir, etc., 

D. HUMPHREYS.* 

With this recommendation of Humphreys Jefferson 
evidently complied, though there is nothing but the result 
toi prove it, and made the necessary agreement with Duvivier. 
After that he ceased to concern himself with the matter and 
the medal seems tO' have been forgotten by every one. It 
was finished in the spring of 1789 and Jefferson might easily 
have taken it with him on his departure for home in 
Sqitember of that year, but he evidently did not. In the 
summer of 1789 it was on exhibition at the annual pageant 
of the "Academic Royale" among the "gravures'' of "M'. 
Duvivier, Graveur g^n^ral des Monnoies et des Medailles 
du Roi''. With it were two other medals for "le Colonel 

•Letters to Jefferson, series 2, Vol. 40, No. 5, Dept. of State. The 
expression, "The Street St. Thomas, de Louvre", shows how little 
aptitude the writer had for acquiring the French language. 



23 

Washington" and "\e Colonel Howard". The former of 
these two was a kinsman of Washington, son of Bailey 
Washington, a brave and heroic soldier, who, like Lieut. 
Colonel Howard, distinguished himself at the battle of the 
Cowpens and elsewhere. I give in a note the full text of 
this display of Duvivier's work.* 

At this period Duvivier was 55 years old and in the prime 
of his faculties. If talent, experience, and intelligent, i>erpetuai 
devotion to his art went for anything, he was well equipped 
for the work he undertook, or for any other in his own 
province. He fully deserved his position as indisputably the 
first engraver of his day, noi slight distinction as the 
contemporary of Dupr6, Galle, Dumarest and Andrieu. He 
had been a member of the Academy of Painting and Sculpture 
since 1774 and oveir a hundred medals bore testimony to his 
po wers. '^"•■' 'ihis was a record of devotion, skill and diligence 

""*Gravures. 
Par M. Duvivier, Graveur g^n^rel des Monnoies and des 
Medailles du Roi. 

319 Cadrp ronfermant les objets suivans. 
No. 1. Pont de Louis XV [. 

2. Travaux de la Rade de Cherbourg. 

3. Etablissement de la Manufacture Royale d' HorlogSrie. 

4. Buste de M. Necker. 

5. Buste de M. Bailly. 

6. Buste du General Washington, et au revers, Evacuation de 
Boston, 1776. 

7 & 8. Medailles pour le Colonel "Washington and le Colonel 
Howard. Ces 3 Medailles sont pour les Etats-Unls de 1' Amerique. 

9. Difterens Jetons d' Academies and autres.' Explication des 
Peintures, Sculptures et Gravures de Messiers de 1' Academic Royale, 
1789. p. 54. 

**A complete list of his works is given by Emile Bellier de la 
Chavignerie in his "Dictionnaire General des Artistes de 1' Ecole 
Prangaise," Paris, 1882. 

Nagle says, in his "Neues Allegemeines Kunstler-Lexicon," 
"Duvivier's works reveal a skilful draughtsman and designer, familiar 
with the technical dexterity of a sculptor, happy in invention and 
no less so in the expression of his heads". These qualities must have 
tended to make his work on the Washington medal still more irksome 
than it would otherwise have been. 



24 

that would have teen a credit to any artist. The range of 
his powers as a medaUist was unlimited and was founded on 
early study, broad and deep, noi less than on inherited insight, 
as the son of a distinguished father. As Quartremere de 
Ouincy says, "les ouvrages de M. Duvivier sont recommand- 
ables par une irare habilet^ d' execution, car on sait qu' il 
poss^dait Ji un degre sup^rieur 1' art de tailler 1' acier. Mais 
plusieurs se recommandent encore par des qualit^s pr^cieuses, 
par un gout de composition qui caract^rise le style de V 
(^poque et sa tendance de r^tour vers les principes de 1' 
anitique. Nous devons surtout louer M. Duvivier d' avoir 
connu et respect^ les linlites de son art, d' avoir su se 
renfermer fid^lement dans le cercle des convenances que la 
nature lui prescrit."* 

As "Graveur du roi'', the reign of Louis XV had afforded 
Duvivier an immense variety oi subjects for his burin. The 
royal coronation and marriage; the American war; the new 
harbor of Cherbourg; the canal of the Saone; these are but 
few of the notable events that he was summoned to eternize 
in gold or bronze. He even portrayed with exquisite delicacy 
of touch and marvellous accuracy the fagade of Orleans 
cathedral, with an admirable portrait of Henry IV, and also 
that of the Ecole Militaire, wiith the bust oi its founder, 
Louis XV. These all displayed that rare ability for 
condensing into^ a small space the broadest and miost striking 
scenes and subjects which was so^ peculiarly his forte; that 
faculty which, as Quatremere says, "consiste a r^duire aux 
moindres termes chaque action, cliaque image, de mani^re a 
faire voir, non la partie insignifiante d' un tout, mais le tout 
clairement signifie par ce qui n' est que la partie". 

Thus richly endowed, thus constituted, and with these lofty 
ideals, it could hardly be expected that Duvivier would be 
much in sympathy with the Washington medal, or feel stirred 
to put forth of his very best in its behalf. He naturally cared 

"*'■ *Institut Royal de France. Acad^mie Royale des Beaux arts. 
Notice Historique sur la Vie et les Ouvrages de M. Duvivier. Par 
M. Quatrem^re de Quincy, Secrf'taire perpetuel. Lue a la Stance 
publique du 6 Oct.. 1821." 



25 

little for Boston, a remote and indefinite settlement on the 
edge of a vast wilderness, and as for its distinguished 
conqueror, he stood forth but dimly at the' best tO' his artistic 
sense. Though eminent for his successful portraiture and 
really more devoted to that than to any other phase of his 
art, he w)as not even tO' enjoy the privilege of taking an 
original likeness of his illustrious subject, but was to^ reduce, 
copy and adapt the bust by Houdon. Nor was the result 
of his work tO' originate with himself. He was to^ do what 
he could with the sketch provided by the Academy of 
Inscriptions and Belles Lettres; tO' give artistic formi and 
expression to the work of another, and to infuse into it as 
much O'f his own style and peculiar talent as he found possible. 
This task could not have been sympathetic, and hence, though 
there are some proofs of his subtle nicety of touch and 
man'^elous facility of execution in the Boston medal, one 
seieks in vain for the finer effects, the dignity, distinctioii 
and skill in composition so characteristic O'f his best efforts. 
Its type, motive, sentiment, subject, wiere all so' different from 
those of any previous undertaking, that, apart from its lack 
O'f originality, the whole effort must have been distasteful 
to a great degree and no' wonder the result was imperfect.* 

*Washington was not a greater sourse of inspiration to Houdon 
than to Duvivier. The work of each was a job, a financial stop-gap, 
and not alluring. No one would think of calling the formers 
statue a great work. It is grandiose, authentic, faithful, deadly life- 
like, while plainly lacking in vigor and freedom of modelling, in 
latent force, in distinctive character and inner light; on the whole 
the inadequate outcome of over two years' hard work. How far 
inferior to Houdon's Voltiare, or to St. Bruno, that silent 
monolith of spiritual dignity and grandeur! What a congestion of 
symbolic impedimenta encumbers it! And then those alien legs! 
The head is the head of Washington, but the legs are the legs 
^ <nv(/</V-of Goremtnr Morris, one of which, alas! was wooden, like the whole 
'"^^^^^'^figure. Fortunately, Washington never saw it. 

Oddly enough, at the very time'— May 14, 1790' — when it was 
placed on its pedestal (though without the least pretense of cere- 
mony or even a word in the papers) the whole country was resound- 
ing with the vilest execration of Washington, of his policy, and even 
of his personal character. He was held up to contempt as "Mon- 



26 

For the next ten years after 1789 the history of the 
medal is a blank and I have not been able to find one single 
trace of its existence, though I have made a thorough and 
persistent search, both at home and abroad. It is a perfect 
mystery and bids fair to remain so. Ordinarily, Duvivier, 
after the close oi the Salon in the fall of 1789, would have 
delivered the medal tO' the successor of Jefferson, as minister 
from the United States, and been paid the amount due him, 
but I can discover nothing to prove it, not even in the records 
of the Treasury, though 2400 livres was a goodly sum in 
those days. The American minister would then naturally 
intrust it to some responsible agent for transmission to the 
Secretary oi the Treasury, as evidence of the expenditure of 
the sum that had been given for it, and from; him it would 
be passed on to the Speaker of the House oi Representatives, 
who w.oiild preseuit it to Washington, either with formal 
ceremony in the House, or informally by messenger. Of 
all these presumptions not, a sign is apparent, and it is a fair 
deduction that the medal was simply sent to Mount Vernon 
by the messenger who^ took it across the Atlantic, which no 
one had any right, legal or other, tO' do. There is no reference 
to it in any shape in Washington's letters, or other writings, 
and, so far as can now be discovered, it was soon hidden 
away in the gloom of that famous "iron chest" in which, 
the Chieftain kept his valuables, and was neveir taken out 
untlil it fell intO' the hands of his executors.* 

With the exception of the passage on page one from his 
letter to Humphreys, there is nothing to show that 

tezuma", and, as he himself wrote to Jefferson in July of that year, 
"every act of my administration was tortured and the grossest and 
most insidious misrepresentations of them made, and that, too, in 
such exaggerated and indecent terms as could scarcely be applied 
to a Nero, a notorious defaulter, or even to a common pickpocket.^' 
In February the House even refused its customary tribute of a half- 
hour's adjournment in order to call on him on his birthday. 

♦While collecting the materials for her valuable work on the 
"Portraits of Washington", Mrs. Elizabeth Bryant Johnson made 
great exertions towards tracing the history of the medal during the 
ten years above mentioned but, I understand, without the least success. 



27 

Washington attached much importance to the Boston miedal. 
He certainly did not care enough about it toi bequeath it to 
any person or institution, though in his will he disposed of 
various swords and other objects of value and interest to 
relations and friends. The peculiar action of his executors 
and appraisers evidently reflected his own feeling towards 
it. It is sad to think that the appraisers estimated its value 
at $150 only and that for this sum it was suffered to become 
the property of George Steptoe Washington,* son of Samuel, 
the shiftless, impecunious, insolvent brother, whom Washing- 
ton had so often been summoned to help out of the financial 
quagmires in which he was continually on the verge of being 
swallowed up.** 

*George Steptoe was also a legatee and received one of his Uncle's 
swords besides. 

''*'"In God's name, how did my brother Samuel contrive to get 
himself so enormously in debt?" Thus wrote Washington to his 
brother, John Augustine, -'Newburgh, 16 Jan., 1783," about a year 
after Samuel's death at the age of 47. As the latter had induced 
five women to marry him, in the course of 23 years, poor as he 
was, this may have had something to do with his impecuniosity. 
Five wives would tend to impoverish any man, however ^'surviguouSi VM-Sf* 
and might even promote his early and happy despatch. 

The above exclamation well illustrates Washington's forcible 
utterance, when laboring under momentary excitement. Landor, in 
the "Conversation between Washington and Franklin", makes him 
say of St. Augustine, "Oh, the knave!" apropos of the latter's sly 
dab at the Trinity. 

The official inventory of Washington's estate includes 22 items, 
as the contents of the iron chest in which were kept bonds and 
mortgages, stock certificates and other valuables. Among these were 
"1 gold box presented by t'ne Corporation of New York, $100". Also 
"1 gold medal of St. Patrick Society, $8". Also "1 large gold medal 
of General Washington, .|1.50". These two medals are the only ones 
of gold in the chest. The description of the Boston medal is 
singularly brief and indefinite, and the appraisers would seem to have 
been as ignorant of its origin and its historic significance, as they 
were of its value merely as so much metal. Their names were Thomas 
Mason, Tobias Lear, Thomas Peter and Wmi. Foote. Whatever may 
be said of the others, it seems hardly possible that Tobias Lear, 
for nearly fifteen years Washington's secretary and intimate friend, 
could have been so ignorant, indifferent and faithless as is shown by 



28 



Another of the inexplicable problems connected with the 
medal is the final fate of the die. The query very naturally 
arises, what has become of it? When Duvivier delivered 
the medal it was his duty to deliver the die with it, and it wab 
the duty of the receiver to require him to do^ so before 
payment If he did not do so, what was tlie reason, and is 
the die still in Paris? If it is still the^e, it ought to be 
restored to its rightful owners. If it was given toi Washington 
with the medal, why did he not put it in the iron chest 
with his other valuables ? But there is no trace of it in 
the inventOiry. And yet whO' would be likely tO' have taken 
it from its owner? It was not worth stealing, as it could 
not be disposed of, while it was too valuable to be thrown 
away as old metal. Altogether it seems doomed to exist only 
as a memory and as a souvenir Oif Col. Humphreys' bungling 
lack of method and shiftless indifference. 

Having reached the end of my investigation, I can only 
add the trite comment that the result shows how hard the 
truth is tO' get at. In this instance it seems even more elusive 
than usual. From the few facts available we find that the 
evolution of the medal was at last accomplished with tardy 
delil^e'ration and no enthusiasmi on the part of those tO' whom 
it had been entrusted; that the medal, in some inscnitable 
way, was apparently transferred from Paris to Mount Venion, 
and that it was then, suffered toi dwindle intO' premature and 
undeserved oblivion, whence it did not emerge for over half 
a century. It may well be doubted whether any similar 
occurrence ever happened, and wherl one reflects on the event 
the medal was intended to commemorate and its national 
importance, as well as on the great distinction of all those 
connected with both the event and the medal, the povelrty 
of its history must strike every one as extraordinary and 
inexplicable. 

Apart from its historic significance, the medal of itself was 

their sworn estimate. It should be said, however, that the gold 
box presented by the city of New York was as ranch 'jndervalue"ii 
as the Boston medal, though some attempt was made to describe 
it correctly. 



29 

an object tO' take pdde in and tO' portray in terms of praise 
to one's friends. Unique on this side of the Atlantic ; a 
treasure of art, of skill and richness; fresh from the mint, 
glowing with virgin beauty, how could even Washington, 
imperturable as he was, help rejoicing in its embodied glory 
and seeking to impart it at least tO' members of his household 
or to his guests? Apparently, he imparted the splendors of 
the medal to no one, either under his own roof, or elsewhere, 
but on the contrary, kept it apart "as a thing forbid", or 
under some strange and mortal ban. And such was the 
attitude towards it of all who' had anything to do with it, 
so invariable was their reticence, so universal the mysterious 
and portentous avoidance. Why did Washington in all his 
vast correspondence never mention it after it had come into 
his possession? Why did Jefferson, Morris, Jay, and the rest 
ignore it in theirs? Why did Humphreys, foriever writing 
and chattering, omit all reference to it? Why — but one 
might ask such questions by the score without awakening 
even the echo' of a suggestion, or the ghost of a reminiscence. 
Let us be thankful that the medal, though bearing marks 
of a, friction that could have come only from rough handling 
and irreverent neglect, has at last reached a harbor of refuge, 
a permanent, fit and conspicuous abode, where we trust it 
will continue for ages as a. symbol of a noble struggle and 
O'f a noble victory by a, noble man. 

This little treatise has been based on the assumption that 
the Boston medal, now in its Public Library, was actually 
in the possession of Washington, and was also the original 
done by Duvivier and exhibited in the Salon of 1789. The 
former of these statements must be admitted as beyond 
dispute, though there is not a shred of any but circumstantial 
evidence to support it. However, an article, vaguely described 
as "a gold medal of General Washington", was apparently 
found among the valuables kept by him in an "iron chest" 
and sworn to by the appraisers as a part of his personal 
estate; the same medal became the property of George Steptoe 
Washington after his uncle's death and remained in his family 



30 

until its purchase by certain citizens of Boston; moreover, its 
identity is endorsed by its agreement with the description 
given by Col. Humphreys in the letter to Washington above 
quoted. 

In view of these cohesive and infallible links, the claim 
of the medal in question to have actually been in the possession 
of Washington must be conceded, in spite of the strange and 
inexplicable lack of more decisive proof from its fonner owner. 

As to the latter of the above statements much can be said 
on -the opposite side. 

In the first place there are many plausible, not to say well- 
founded, reasons, to infer that the medal may have remained 
in Paris for a long time, possibly for years, after its completior, 
and till near the close of Washington's life. After Jefferson 
had taken his final departure from Paris, leaving the medal 
to shift for itself, when he might soi easily have taken it with 
him. there was absolutely no one, either at home or abroad, 
to look after it; to see that the artist was pakl and his work 
delivered. Humphreys was far too' busy operating for his 
appointment as minister tO' Portugal to concern himself about 
anybody, or anything, else. Jefferson's successor felt even le?s 
interest in the matter than Jefferson himself. Moreover the 
United States treasury was nearly banknipt in face of the 
numerous and steadily increasuig claims upon it and 
in noi condition to pay even, such a sum as 2400 livres; nor 
was the tireasurer in a condition to thank any minister to 
France who should urge such a demand upon him, and, as I 
have said, a careful examination of the early national accounts 
fails to reveal the payment of any such sum at any time. 

In addition to these facts, one should call to mind the steadily 
waning popularity of Washington, which at last, as I have 
already mentioned, developed into popular detestation, curses 
and frantic abuse, sO' that if payment for the medal could have 
been delayed, or even stopped altogether, the act would have 
met with general approval. 

In Paris affairs were in such a state as to offer little aid 
to any undertaking whatever, foreign or domestic. By the 



31 

year 1790 the French Revolution could be well foreseen, with 
its relentless and destructive maelstrom of chaos, ruin and 
death. Duvivier had been a prosperous man, like his father be- 
fore him, but he was one of thirteen children and by tlie time 
he had reached his fiftieth year was provided with a goodly ar- 
ray O'f poor relations, in addition to his own family. In 1793 he 
was suddenly and ruthlessly turned out of his office as graveur 
du roi, and thus when well advanced in age, was again forced 
toi face the world with more responsibilities than ever, while 
his savings had been, largely consumed in that infernal 
holocaust, and his present earnings were represented by tons 
of worthless assignats. What wonder if, with both the medal 
and the die in his possession, he should have decided to 
appropriate the former and substitute another of baser metal ! 
It would hardly seem improbable and certainly not impossible 
under the circumstances, all the more that his former position 
would make such a coup perfectly feasible and very unlikely 
tO' be detected. It was thus as a kind of dernietr ressort, a 
forlorn hope, that he clung to the die, being far sighted 
enough tO' detect the dawn of coming disaster and a chance of 
salvation when all else had failed. This surmise may not be 
capable of proof, but it has, at least, the germs of truth. 
Though not "a primordial and incontestable fact", to use the 
compact formula of Mr. Arnold, it is certainly open to- pro- 
fuse, argumentative expansion. It is merely offered as a possi- 
bility, with the farther suggestion that it is supported, to a 
certain extent, by the present state, color, weight and general 
aspect of the medal, though these may doubtless be partly 
attributed tO' hard experiences in the past and tO' the friction 
O'f rough and inappreciative hands. 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



011 783 388 4 



ConscrvaUon ReMorces 
Ug-Freef» Type I 
Ph 8.5, Buffered 



